Talas v. Correct Piping Co., Inc.
Decision Date | 18 May 1982 |
Docket Number | No. 381S52,381S52 |
Citation | 435 N.E.2d 22 |
Parties | Woodrow TALAS, Appellant (Plaintiff below), v. CORRECT PIPING COMPANY, INC., Appellee (Defendant below). |
Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
Michael R. Morow, Munster, for appellant; Leonard M. Ring & Associates, Chicago, Ill., of counsel.
Samuel J. Furlin, Spangler, Jennings, Spangler & Dougherty, P. C., Merrillville, for appellee.
This cause was brought before this Court on the petition to transfer of Woodrow Talas, who sought review of the Court of Appeals' opinion found at Talas v. Correct Piping Co., Inc., (1980) Ind.App., 409 N.E.2d 1223. We have previously granted Talas's petition, vacated the opinion of the Court of Appeals, and twice remanded this cause to the Full Industrial Board of Indiana with instructions that the Board enter the specific findings of fact upon which its decision is based. Talas v. Correct Piping Co., Inc., (1981) Ind., 426 N.E.2d 26; Talas v. Correct Piping Co., Inc., (1981) Ind., 416 N.E.2d 845.
On June 25, 1978, Talas fell from scaffolding while acting in the employ of Correct Piping Company. As a result of the fall, Talas was rendered a traumatic quadriplegic.
The record reveals Talas was hospitalized until August 3, 1978, when he was transferred to the Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago located in Chicago, Illinois. He was released from the Rehabilitation Institute on January 19, 1979, and returned to his home, where he received around-the-clock nursing care until June 16, 1979. Correct Piping Company paid the expenses of the nursing care until May 13, 1979.
Meanwhile, Talas and Correct Piping had executed a Form 12 agreement which was approved by the Industrial Board on April 6, 1979. Therein, the parties stipulated that Talas had suffered temporary disability from June 26, 1978, until December 6, 1978, and that he had sustained "100% permanent impairment of the man as a whole and 100% total permanent disability." The parties agreed that Talas should be awarded $120 a week for a period not to exceed five hundred weeks, the maximum time frame established under the Workmen's Compensation Act. See, Ind.Code § 22-3-3-8 (Burns 1981 Supp.); Ind.Code § 22-3-3-10 (Burns 1981 Supp.); Ind.Code § 22-3-3-22 (Burns 1981 Supp.).
Included in the Form 12 agreement was the following stipulation by the parties:
On September 21, 1979, Talas filed an emergency petition with the Industrial Board seeking an award of nursing care and services as necessary to sustain and maintain his life.
A hearing was held on the petition on November 28, 1979; based on the evidence and recognition that the Industrial Board may order an employer to furnish medical treatment, services, and supplies so as to limit or reduce the extent of impairment, the hearing officer ordered Correct Piping to pay for "all the medical and nursing care needed by plaintiff as a result of his said accidental injury, in order to reduce his disability or impairment."
Correct Piping Company then appealed the hearing officer's decision to the Full Industrial Board. Based on its review of the evidence, the Full Board overruled the hearing officer's determination and directed that Talas "take nothing" by way of his petition.
Talas then sought judicial review of the Full Board's determination, arguing among other things that the Board had failed to enter adequately specific findings of fact. As previously noted, this Court agreed with Talas and so assumed jurisdiction of his appeal. Talas v. Correct Piping, supra.
The Board has now presented us with findings of basic fact which embody the specificity necessary to permit an informed and intelligent review of its decision that Talas "take nothing." Those findings supplied to this Court on remand read in pertinent part:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Noblesville Casting Div. of TRW, Inc. v. Prince
...the evidence leads inalterably to a conclusion contrary to that reached by the Board will its decision be disturbed. Talas v. Correct Piping Co., (1982) Ind., 435 N.E.2d 22; White v. Woolery Stone Co., Inc., (1979) Ind.App., 396 N.E.2d The record reveals that in addition to Dr. Norman's tes......
-
Tippmann v. Hensler
...Act should be liberally construed to effectuate the humane purposes of the Act...." Id. at 331-32 (citing Talas v. Correct Piping Co., Inc., 435 N.E.2d 22, 28 (Ind.1982)). We do not believe those "humane purposes" include shielding from civil liability an employee who intentionally injures ......
-
Evans v. Yankeetown Dock Corp.
...to liberally construe those laws in favor of the employee in order to effectuate their humane purposes. See, e.g., Talas v. Correct Piping Co. (1982), Ind., 435 N.E.2d 22.In speaking of such willful or wanton misconduct, we do not mean to include intentional or reckless acts of third partie......
-
Denton v. Sunflower Elec. Co-op.
...connotes limitation of function. See, for example, Rork v. Szabo Foods, 439 N.E.2d 1338, 1342 (Ind.1982); Talas v. Correct Piping Co., Inc., 435 N.E.2d 22, 26 (Ind.1982). We pause to observe that reported Kansas appellate opinions in workers' compensation cases display instances of imprecis......
-
C. Medical Compensation
...v. Boise Cascade Corp., 370 P.2d 191 (Idaho 1962); Burd v. Indus. Comm'n, 566 N.E.2d 35 (Ill. App. 1991); Talas v. Correct Piping Co., 435 N.E.2d 22 (Ind. 1982); Quaker Oats Co. v. Ciha, 552 N.W.2d 143 (Iowa 1996); Bevins Coal Co. v. Ramey, 947 S.W.2d 55 (Ky. 1997); Higgins v. Dep't of Heal......